Nex is a lightweight Internet protocol reminiscent to me of Spartan (which CapsulePress also supports), but even more lightweight.
Without even affordances like host identification, MIME types, response codes, or the expectation that Gemtext might be supported by the client, it’s perhaps more like Gopher than it is
like Gemini.
It comes from the ever-entertaining smolweb hub of Nightfall City, whose Web interface clearly states at the top of every page the command you
could have run to see that content over the Nex protocol. Lagrange added support for Nex almost a year ago and it’s such a lightweight protocol that I was quickly able
to adapt CapsulePress’s implementation of Spartan to support Nex, too.
Why, you might ask? Well, the reasons are the same as all the other standards supported by CapsulePress:
The smolweb is awesome.
Making WordPress into a CMS things it was never meant to do is sorta my jam.
It was a quick win while I waited for the pharmacist to shoot me up with 5G microchips my ‘flu and Covid boosters.
If you want to add Nex onto your CapsulePress, just git pull the latest version, ensure TCP port 1900 isn’t firewalled, and don’t add USE_NEX=false to
your environment. That’s all!
Look at the following list of words and try to find the intruder:
wp-activate.php
wp-admin
wp-blog-header.php
wp_commentmeta
wp_comments
wp-comments-post.php
wp-config-sample.php
wp-content
wp-cron.php
wp engine
wp-includes
wp_jetpack_sync_queue
wp_links
wp-links-opml.php
wp-load.php
wp-login.php
wp-mail.php
wp_options
wp_postmeta
wp_posts
wp-settings.php
wp-signup.php
wp_term_relationships
wp_term_taxonomy
wp_termmeta
wp_terms
wp-trackback.php
wp_usermeta
wp_users
What are these words?
Well, all the ones that contain an underscore _ are names of the WordPress core database tables. All the ones that contain a dash - are WordPress core file
or folder names. The one with a space is a company name…
…
A smart (if slightly tongue-in-cheek) observation by my colleague Paolo, there. The rest of his article’s cleverer and worth-reading if you’re following the WordPress Drama (but it’s
pretty long!).
The people who make the most money in WordPress are not the people who contribute the most (Matt / Automattic really is one of the exceptions here, as I think we are). And this is a
problem. It’s a moral problem. It’s just not equitable.
I agree with Matt about his opinion that a big hosting company such as WPEngine should contribute more. It is the right thing to do. It’s fair. It will make the WordPress community
more egalitarian. Otherwise, it will lead to resentment. I’ve experienced that too.
…
In my opinion, we all should get a say in how we spend those contributions [from companies to WordPress]. I understand that core contributors are very important, but so are the
organizers of our (flagship) events, the leadership of hosting companies, etc. We need to find a way to have a group of people who represent the community and the contributing
corporations.
Just like in a democracy. Because, after all, isn’t WordPress all about democratizing?
Now I don’t mean to say that Matt should no longer be project leader. I just think that we should more transparently discuss with a “board” of some sorts, about the roadmap and the
future of WordPress as many people and companies depend on it. I think this could actually help Matt, as I do understand that it’s very lonely at the top.
With such a group, we could also discuss how to better highlight companies that are contributing and how to encourage others to do so.
…
Some wise words from Joost de Valk, and it’s worth reading his full post if you’re following the
WP Engine drama but would rather be focussing on looking long-term towards a better future for the entire ecosystem.
I don’t know whether Joost’s solution is optimal, but it’s certainly worth considering his ideas if we’re to come up with a new shape for WordPress. It’s good to see that people are
thinking about the bigger picture here, than just wherever we find ourselves at the resolution of this disagreement between Matt/Automattic/the WordPress Foundation and WP Engine.
Thinking bigger is admirable. Thinking bigger is optimistic. Thinking bigger is future-facing.
If you’re active in the WordPress space you’re probably aware that there’s a lot of drama going on right now between (a) WordPress hosting company WP Engine, (b) WordPress
hosting company (among quiteafewotherthings) Automattic1,
and (c) the WordPress Foundation.
If you’re not aware then, well: do a search across the tech news media to see the latest: any summary I could give you would be out-of-date by the time you read it anyway!
In particular, I think a lot of the conversation that he kicked off conflates three different aspects of WP Engine’s misbehaviour. That muddies the waters when it comes to
having a reasoned conversation about the issue3.
I don’t think WP Engine is a particularly good company, and I personally wouldn’t use them for WordPress hosting. That’s not a new opinion for me: I wouldn’t have used them last year or
the year before, or the year before that either. And I broadly agree with what I think Matt tried to say, although not necessarily with the way he said it or the platform he
chose to say it upon.
Misdeeds
As I see it, WP Engine’s potential misdeeds fall into three distinct categories: moral, ethical4,
and legal.
Morally: don’t take without giving back
Matt observes that since WP Engine’s acquisition by huge tech-company-investor Silver Lake, WP Engine have made enormous profits from selling WordPress hosting as a service (and nothing else) while
making minimal to no contributions back to the open source platform that they depend upon.
If true, and it appears to be, this would violate the principle of reciprocity. If you benefit from somebody else’s
effort (and you’re able to) you’re morally-obliged to at least offer to give back in a manner commensurate to your relative level of resources.
Abuse of this principle is… sadly not-uncommon in business. Or in tech. Or in the world in general. A lightweight example might be the many millions of profitable companies that host
atop the Apache HTTP Server without donating a penny to the Apache Foundation. A heavier (and legally-backed) example might be Trump Social’s
implementation being based on a modified version of Mastodon’s code:
Mastodon’s license requires that their changes are shared publicly… but they don’t do until they’re sent threatening letters reminding them of their obligations.
I feel like it’s fair game to call out companies that act amorally, and encourage people to boycott them, so long as you do so without “punching down”.
Ethically: don’t exploit open source’s liberties as weaknesses
WP Engine also stand accused of altering the open source code that they host in ways that maximise their profit, to the detriment of both their customers and the original authors of
that code5.
It’s well established, for example, that WP Engine disable the “revisions” feature of WordPress6.
Personally, I don’t feel like this is as big a deal as Matt makes out that it is (I certainly wouldn’t go as far as saying “WP
Engine is not WordPress”): it’s pretty commonplace for large hosting companies to tweak the open source software that they host to better fit their architecture and business model.
But I agree that it does make WordPress as-provided by WP Engine significantly less good than would be expected from virtually any other host (most of which, by the way, provide much
better value-for-money at any price point).
It also looks like WP Engine may have made more-nefarious changes, e.g. modifying the referral links in open source code (the thing that earns money for the original authors of
that code) so that WP Engine can collect the revenue themselves when they deploy that code to their customers’ sites. That to me feels like it’s clearly into the zone ethical bad
practice. Within the open source community, it’s not okay to take somebody’s code, which they were kind enough to release under a liberal license, strip out the bits that provide
their income, and redistribute it, even just as a network service8.
Again, I think this is fair game to call out, even if it’s not something that anybody has a right to enforce legally. On which note…
Obviously, this is the part of the story you’re going to see the most news media about, because there’s reasonable odds it’ll end up in front of a judge at some point. There’s a good
chance that such a case might revolve around WP Engine’s willingness (and encouragement?) to allow their business to be called “WordPress Engine” and to capitalise on any confusion that
causes.
I’m not going to weigh in on the specifics of the legal case: I Am Not A Lawyer and all that. Naturally I agree with the underlying principle that one should not be allowed to profit
off another’s intellectual property, but I’ll leave discussion on whether or not that’s what WP Engine are doing as a conversation for folks with more legal-smarts than I. I’ve
certainly known people be confused by WP Engine’s name and branding, though, and think that they must be some kind of “officially-licensed” WordPress host: it happens.
If you’re following all of this drama as it unfolds… just remember to check your sources. There’s a lot of FUD floating around on the Internet right now9.
In summary…
With a reminder that I’m sharing my own opinion here and not that of my employer, here’s my thoughts on the recent WP Engine drama:
WP Engine certainly act in ways that are unethical and immoral and antithetical to the spirit of open source, and those are just a subset of the reasons that I wouldn’t use them as
a WordPress host.
Matt Mullenweg calling them out at WordCamp US doesn’t get his point across as well as I think he hoped it might, and probably won’t win him any popularity contests.
I’m not qualified to weigh in on whether or not WP Engine have violated the WordPress Foundation’s trademarks, but I suspect that they’ve benefitted from widespread confusion about
their status.
Footnotes
1 I suppose I ought to point out that Automattic is my employer, in case you didn’t know,
and point out that my opinions don’t necessarily represent theirs, etc. I’ve been involved with WordPress as an open source project for about four times as long as I’ve had any
connection to Automattic, though, and don’t always agree with them, so I’d hope that it’s a given that I’m speaking my own mind!
2 Though like Manu, I don’t
think that means that Matt should take the corresponding blog post down: I’m a digital preservationist, as might be evidenced by the unrepresentative-of-me and frankly embarrassing
things in the 25-year archives of this blog!
3 Fortunately the documents that the lawyers for both sides have been writing are much
clearer and more-specific, but that’s what you pay lawyers for, right?
4 There’s a huge amount of debate about the difference between morality and ethics, but
I’m using the definition that means that morality is based on what a social animal might be expected to decide for themselves is right, think e.g. the Golden Rule etc., whereas ethics is the code of conduct expected within a particular community. Take stealing, for example,
which covers the spectrum: that you shouldn’t deprive somebody else of something they need, is a moral issue; that we as a society deem such behaviour worthy of exclusion is an
ethical one; meanwhile the action of incarcerating burglars is part of our legal framework.
5 Not that nobody’s immune to making ethical mistakes. Not me, not you, not anybody else.
I remember when, back in 2005, Matt fucked up by injecting ads into WordPress (which at that point didn’t have a reliable source of
funding). But he did the right thing by backpedalling, undoing the harm, and apologising publicly and profusely.
6 WP Engine claim that they disable revisions for performance reasons, but that’s clearly
bullshit: it’s pretty obvious to me that this is about making hosting cheaper. Enabling revisions doesn’t have a performance impact on a properly-configured multisite hosting system,
and I know this from personal experience of running such things. But it does have a significant impact on how much space you need to allocate to your users, which has cost
implications at scale.
7 As an aside: if a court does rule that WP Engine is infringing upon
WordPress trademarks and they want a new company name to give their service a fresh start, they’re welcome to TurdPress.
8 I’d argue that it is okay to do so for personal-use though: the difference for
me comes when you’re making a profit off of it. It’s interesting to find these edge-cases in my own thinking!
9 A typical Reddit thread is about 25% lies-and-bullshit; but you can double that for a
typical thread talking about this topic!
I used to pay for VaultPress. Nowadays I get it for free as one of the many awesome perks of my job. But I’d probably still pay for it
because it’s a lifesaver.
Like my occasional video content, this isn’t designed to replace any of my blogging: it’s just a different medium for those that might prefer it.
For some stories, I guess that audio might be a better way to find out what I’ve been thinking about. Just like how the vlog version of my post about
my favourite video game Easter Egg might be preferable because video as a medium is better suited to demonstrating a computer game, perhaps
audio’s the right medium for some of the things I write about, too?
But as much as not, it’s just a continuation of my efforts to explore different media over which a WordPress blog can be delivered2.
Also, y’know, my ongoing effort to do what I’m bad at in the hope that I might get better at a wider diversity of skills.
How?
Let’s start by understanding what a “podcast” actually is. It is, in essence, just an RSS feed (something you might have heard me talk about before…) with audio enclosures – basically, “attachments” – on each item. The idea was spearheaded by Dave Winer back in 2001 as a
way of subscribing to rich media like audio or videos in such a way that slow Internet connections could pre-download content so you didn’t have to wait for it to buffer.3
Here’s what I had to do to add podcasting capability to my theme:
The tag
I use a post tag, dancast, to represent posts with accompanying podcast content4.
This way, I can add all the podcast-specific metadata only if the user requests the feed of that tag, and leave my regular feeds untampered . This means that you don’t
get the podcast enclosures in the regular subscription; that might not be what everybody would want, but it suits me to serve podcasts only to people who explicitly ask for
them.
Okay, onto the code (which I’ve open-sourced over here). I’ve use a series of standard WordPress hooks to
add the functionality I need. The important bits are:
rss2_item – to add the <enclosure>, <itunes:duration>, <itunes:image>, and
<itunes:explicit> elements to the feed, when requesting a feed with my nominated tag. Only <enclosure> is strictly required, but appeasing Apple
Podcasts is worthwhile too. These are lifted directly from the post metadata.
the_excerpt_rss – I have another piece of post metadata in which I can add a description of the podcast (in practice, a list of chapter times); this hook
swaps out the existing excerpt for my custom one in podcast feeds.
rss_enclosure – some podcast syndication platforms and players can’t cope with RSS feeds in which an item has multiple enclosures, so as a
safety precaution I strip out any enclosures that WordPress has already added (e.g. the featured image).
the_content_feed – my RSS feed usually contains the full text of every post, because I don’t like feeds that try to force you to go to the
original web page5
and I don’t want to impose that on others. But for the podcast feed, the text content of the post is somewhat redundant so I drop it.
rss2_ns – of critical importance of course is adding the relevant namespaces to your XML declaration. I use the itunes namespace, which provides the widest compatibility for specifying metadata, but I also use the
newer podcast namespace, which has growing compatibility and provides some modern features, most of which I don’t
use except specifying a license. There’s no harm in supporting both.
rss2_head – here’s where I put in the metadata for the podcast as a whole: license, category, type, and so on. Some of these fields are
effectively essential for best support.
You’re welcome, of course, to lift any of all of the code for your own purposes. WordPress makes a perfectly reasonable platform for podcasting-alongside-blogging, in my experience.
What?
Finally, there’s the question of what to podcast about.
My intention is to use podcasting as an alternative medium to my traditional blog posts. But not every blog post is suitable for conversion into a podcast! Ones that rely on images
(like my post about dithering) aren’t a great choice. Ones that have lots of code that you might like to copy-and-paste are especially unsuitable.
Also: sometimes I just can’t be bothered. It’s already some level of effort to write a blog post; it’s like an extra 25% effort on top of that to record, edit, and upload a podcast
version of it.
That’s not nothing, so I’ve tended to reserve podcasts for blog posts that I think have a sort-of eccentric “general interest” vibe to them. When I learn something new and feel the need
to write a thousand words about it… that’s the kind of content that makes it into a podcast episode.
Which is why I’ve been calling the endeavour “a podcast nobody asked for, about things only Dan Q cares about”. I’m capable of getting nerdsniped
easily and can quickly find my way down a rabbit hole of learning. My podcast is, I guess, just a way of sharing my passion for trivial deep dives with the rest of the world.
My episodes are probably shorter than most podcasts: my longest so far is around fifteen minutes, but my shortest is only two and a half minutes and most are about seven. They’re meant
to be a bite-size alternative to reading a post for people who prefer to put things in their ears than into their eyes.
Anyway: if you’re not listening already, you can subscribe from here or in your favourite podcasting app. Or you can just follow my blog as normal
and look for a streamable copy of podcasts at the top of selected posts (like this one!).
2 As well as Web-based non-textual content like audio (podcasts) and video (vlogs), my blog is wholly or partially available over a variety of more-exotic protocols: did you find me yet on Gemini (gemini://danq.me/), Spartan (spartan://danq.me/), Gopher (gopher://danq.me/), and even Finger
(finger://danq.me/, or run e.g. finger blog@danq.me from your command line)? Most of these are powered by my very own tool CapsulePress, and I’m itching to try a few more… how about a WordPress blog that’s accessible over FTP, NNTP, or DNS? I’m not even kidding when I say
I’ve got ideas for these…
3 Nowadays, we have specialised media decoder co-processors which reduce the size of media
files. But more-importantly, today’s high-speed always-on Internet connections mean that you probably rarely need to make a conscious choice between streaming or downloading.
4 I actually intended to change the tag to podcast when I went-live,
but then I forgot, and now I can’t be bothered to change it. It’s only for my convenience, after all!
Why must a blog comment be text? Why could it not be… a drawing?1
I started hacking about and playing with a few ideas and now, on selected posts including this one, you can draw me a comment instead of typing one.
I opened the feature, experimentally (in a post available only to RSS subscribers2) the
other week, but now you get a go! Also, I’ve open-sourced the whole thing, in case you want to pick it apart.
What are you waiting for: scroll down, and draw me a comment!
Footnotes
1 I totally know the reasons that a blog comment shouldn’t be a drawing; I’m not
completely oblivious. Firstly, it’s less-expressive: words are versatile and you can do a lot with them. Secondly, it’s higher-bandwidth: images take up more space, take longer to
transmit, and that effect compounds when – like me – you’re tracking animation data too. But the single biggest reason, and I can’t stress this enough, is… the
penises. If you invite people to draw pictures on your blog, you’re gonna see a lot of penises. Short penises, long penises, fat penises, thin penises. Penises of every shape
and size. Some erect and some flacid. Some intact and some circumcised. Some with hairy balls and some shaved. Many of them urinating or ejaculating. Maybe even a few with smiley
faces. And short of some kind of image-categorisation AI thing, you can’t realistically run an anti-spam tool to detect hand-drawn penises.
2 I’ve copied a few of my favourites of their drawings below. Don’t forget to subscribe if you want early access to any weird shit I make.
Terence Eden, who’s apparently inspiring several posts this week, recently shared a way to attach a hook to WordPress’s
get_the_post_thumbnail() function in order to remove the extraneous “closing mark” from the (self-closing in HTML) <img> element.
By default, WordPress outputs e.g. <img src="..." />, where <img src="..."> would suffice.
It’s an inconsequential difference for most purposes, but apparently it bugs him, so he fixed it… although he went on to observe that he hadn’t managed to successfully tackle
all the instances in which WordPress was outputting redundant closing marks.
This is a problem that I’ve already solved here on my blog. My solution’s slightly hacky… but it works!
My Solution: Runing HTMLTidy over WordPress
Tidy is an excellent tool for tiding up HTML! I used to use its predecessor back in
the day for all kind of things, but it languished for a few years and struggled with support for modern HTML features. But
in 2015 it made a comeback and it’s gone from strength to strength ever since.
I run it on virtually all pages produced by DanQ.me (go on, click “View Source” and see for yourself!), to:
Standardise the style of the HTML code and make it easier for humans to read1.
Bring old-style emphasis tags like <i>, in my older posts, into a more-modern interpretation, like <em>.
Hoist any inline <style> blocks to the <head>, and detect any repeated inline style="..."s to convert to classes.
Repair any invalid HTML (browsers do this for you, of course, but doing it server-side makes parsing easier for the
browser, which might matter on more-lightweight hardware).
WordPress isn’t really designed to have Tidy bolted onto it, so anything it likely to be a bit of a hack, but here’s my approach:
Install libtidy-dev and build the PHP bindings to it.
Note that if you don’t do this the code might appear to work, but it won’t actually tidy anything2.
Add a new output buffer to my theme’s header.php3, with a callback function: ob_start('tidy_entire_page').
Without an corresponding ob_flush or similar, this buffer will close and the function will be called when PHP
finishes generating the page.
Define the function tidy_entire_page($buffer) Have it instantiate Tidy ($tidy = new tidy) and use $tidy->parseString (with your buffer and Tidy preferences) to tidy the code, then
return $tidy.
Ensure that you’re caching the results!
You don’t want to run this every page load for anonymous users! WP Super Cache on “Expert” mode (with the
requisite webserver configuration) might help.
1 I miss the days when most websites were handwritten and View Source typically looked
nice. It was great to learn from, too, especially in an age before we had DOM debuggers. Today: I can’t justify
dropping my use of a CMS, but I can make my code readable.
2 For a few of its extensions, some PHP developer made the interesting choice to fail silently if the required extension is missing. For example: if you don’t have the
zip extension enabled you can still usePHPto make ZIP files, but they won’t be
compressed. This can cause a great deal of confusion for developers! A similar issue exists with tidy: if it isn’t installed, you can still call all of the
methods on it… they just don’t do anything. I can see why this decision might have been made – to make the language as portable as possible in production – but I’d
prefer if this were an optional feature, e.g. you had to set try_to_make_do_if_you_are_missing_an_extension=yes in your php.ini to enable it, or if
it at least logged that it had done so.
3 My approach probably isn’t suitable for FSE (“block”) themes, sorry.
I clearly nerdsniped Terence at least a little when I asked whether a blog necessarily had to be HTML, because he went on to implement a WordPress theme that delivers content entirely in plain text.
Might I meet that challenge? Maybe. But it turns out it’s easier than I thought because Kev revised the rules to require only 100 posts in a calendar year (or any other 365-day period, but I’m not
going to start thinking about the maths of that).
That’s not only much more-achievable… I’ve probably already achieved it! Let’s knock out some SQL to check how many posts I
made each year:
A big question in some years is what counts as a post. Kev’s definition is quite liberal and includes basically-everything, but I wonder if mine shouldn’t perhaps be stricter.
For example:
Should I count checkins, even though they’re not always born as blog posts but often start as logs on geocaching websites?
(My gut says yes!)
Do reposts and bookmarks contribute, a significant minority of which are presented without any further
interpretation by me? (My gut says no!)
Does a vlog version of a blog post count separately, or is it a continuation of the same content? (My gut says the volume is too
low to matter!)
Can a retroactive achievement (i.e. from before the challenge was announced) count? Kev writes “there is no specific start date”, but it seems a little counter to
the idea of it specifically being a challenge to claim it when you weren’t attempting the challenge at the time.
Some posts are lost from 1998/1999. If they were recovered I might have made 100 posts in 1999, but probably not in 1998 as I only started blogging on 27 September 1998.
A heartfelt post about saying goodbye to Aberystwyth as I moved to Oxford on 16 June was my 100th of the year. Pedants might argue that
this year shouldn't count, but so long as you're willing to count checkins (and you should) then it would... and my qualifying post would have come only a couple of days
later, with a post about the Headington Shark, which I had just moved-in near to.
I'm not convined this low-blogging year should count: a clear majority of the posts were geocaching logs, and they weren't always even that verbose (consider this candidate for 100th post of 2013, from 1 October).
Another geocache log heavy, conventional blogpost light year that I'm not convinced should count, evem if the obvious candidate for 100th post would be 18 May's cool article about
geocaching like Batman!
I maintain that checkins should count, even when they're PESOS'd from geocaching sites, so long as they don't make up a majority of the qualifying posts in a year. In
which case this year should qualify, with the 100th post being my visit to this well-hidden London pub
while on my way to a conference.
My blogging ramped up again this year, and on 24 August I shared a motivational poster with a funny twist, plus a pun at the intersection
between my sexuality and my preferred mode of transport.
Total count of all the posts.
Doesn't add up? Not all posts feature in one of the years above!
* Pedants might claim this year was not a success for the reasons described above. Make your own mind up.
In any case, I’d argue that I clearly achieved the revised version of the challenge on certainly six, probably fourteen, arguably (depending on how you count posts) as
many as nineteen different years since I started blogging in 1998. My least-controversial claims would be:
Given all these unanswered questions, I’m not going to just go ahead and raise a PR against the Hall of Fame! Instead, I’ll leave it to
Kev to decide whether I’m (a) eligible to claim a 14-time award, (b) merely eligible for a 4-time award for the years following the challenge starting, or (c) ineligible to claim
success until I intentionally post 100 times in a year (in, at current rates, another two months…). Over to you, Kev…
Update: Kev’s agreed that I can claim the most-recent four of them, so I raised a PR.
You can click an image and see a full-window popup dialog box containing a larger version of the image.
The larger version of the image isn’t loaded until it’s needed.
You can close the larger version with a close button. You can also use your browser’s back button.
You can click again to download the larger version/use your browser to zoom in further.
You can share/bookmark etc. the URL of a zoomed-in image and the recipient will see the same image (and return to the
image, in the right blog post, if they press the close button).
No HTTP round trip is required when opening/closing a lightbox: it’s functionally-instantaneous.2
No JavaScript is used at all.
Here’s how it works –
The Markup
For each lightboxed image in a post, a <dialog> for that image is appended to the post. That dialog contains a larger copy of the image (set to
loading="lazy" so the browser have to download it until it’s needed), and a “close” button.
The image in the post contains an anchor link to the dialog; the close button in the dialog links back to the image in the post.3 I wrap the lightbox image itself in a link to the full version of the
image, which makes it easier for users to zoom in further using their browser’s own tools, if they like.
Even without CSS, this works (albeit with “scrolling” up and down to the larger image). But the clever bit’s yet to
come:
The Style
Lightboxes are hidden by default (display: none), but configured to fill the window when shown.
They’re shown by the selector .lightbox:target, which is triggered by the id of the <dialog> being referenced by the anchor part of
the URL in your address bar!
Summary
It’s neither the most-elegant nor cleanest solution to the problem, but for me it hits a sweet spot between developer experience and user experience. I’m always disappointed when
somebody’s “lightbox” requires some heavyweight third-party JavaScript (often loaded from a CDN), because that seems to be the
epitome of the “take what the Web gives you for free, throw it away, and reimplement it badly in JavaScript” antipattern.
There’s things I’ve considered adding to my lightbox. Progressively-enhanced JavaScript that adds extra value and/or uses the Popover API where available, perhaps? View Transitions to animate the image “blowing up” to the larger size, while the full-size image loads in the
background? Optimistic preloading when hovering over the image4? “Previous/next” image links when lightboxing a gallery? There’s lots of potential to expand it
without breaking the core concept here.
I’d also like to take a deeper dive into the accessibility implications of this approach: I think it’s pretty good, but accessibility is a big topic and there’s always more to
learn.
I hope the idea’s of use to somebody else looking to achieve this kind of thing, too.
Footnotes
1 Where JavaScript is absolutely necessary, I (a) host it on the same domain, for
performance and privacy-respecting reasons, and (b) try to provide a functional alternative that doesn’t require JavaScript, ideally seamlessly.
2 In practice, the lightbox images get lazy-loaded, so there can be a short round
trip to fetch the image the first time. But after that, it’s instantaneous.
3 The pair – post image and lightbox image – work basically the same way as footnotes,
like this one.
4 I already do this with links in general using the excellent instant.page.
The Internet is full of guides on easily making your WordPress installation run fast. If you’re looking to speed up your WordPress site, you should go read those, not this.
Those guides often boil down to the same old tips:
uninstall unnecessary plugins,
optimise caching (both on the server and, via your headers, on clients/proxies),
resize your images properly and/or ensure WordPress is doing this for you,
tune your PHP installation so it’s got enough memory, keeps a process alive, etc.,
ensure your server is minifying2
and compressing files, and
run it on a faster server/behind a faster connection3
The hard way
This article is for people who aren’t afraid to go tinkering in their WordPress codebase to squeeze a little extra (real world!) performance.
It’s for people whose neverending quest for perfection is already well beyond the point of diminishing returns.
But mostly, it’s for people who want to gawp at me, the freak who actually did this stuff just to make his personal blog a tiny bit nippier without spending an extra penny on
hosting.
Don’t start with the hard way. Exhaust all the easy solutions – or at least, make a conscious effort which easy solutions to enact or reject – first. Only if you really
want to get into the weeds should you actually try doing the things I propose here. They’re not for most sites, and they’re not the for faint of heart.
Performance is a tradeoff. Every performance improvement costs you something else: time, money, DX, UX, etc. What you choose to trade for performance gains depends on your priority of constituencies, which may differ from mine.4
This is not a recipe book. This won’t tell you what code to change or what commands to run. The right answers for your content will be different than the right answers
for mine. Also: you shouldn’t change what you don’t understand! But I hope these tips will help you think about what questions you need to ask to make your site blazing fast.
Okay, let’s get started…
1. Backstab the plugins you can’t live without
If there are plugins you can’t remove because you depend upon their functionality, and those plugins inject content (especially JavaScript) on the front-end… backstab them to
undermine that functionality.
For example, if you want Jetpack‘s backup and downtime monitoring features, but you don’t want it injecting random <linkrel='stylesheet' id='...-jetpack-css' href='...' media='all' />‘s (an
extra stylesheet to download and parse) into your pages: find the add_filter hook it uses and remove_filter it in your theme5.
Better yet, remove wp_head() from your theme entirely6.
Now, instead of blocking the hooks you don’t want polluting your <head>, you’re specifically allowing only those you want. You’ll want to take care to get
some semi-essential ones like <link rel="canonical" href="...">7.
Now most of your plugins are broken, but in exchange, your theme has reclaimed complete control over what gets sent to the user. You can select what content you actually
want delivered, and deliver no more than that. It’s harder work for you, but your site becomes so much lighter.
2. Throw away 100% of your render-blocking JavaScript (and as much as you can of the rest)
The single biggest bottleneck to the user viewing a modern WordPress website is the JavaScript that needs to be downloaded, compiled, and executed before the page can be rendered. Most
of that’s plugins, but even on a nearly-vanilla installation you might find a copy of jQuery (eww!) and some other files.
In step 1 you threw it all away, which is great… but I’m betting you were depending on some of that to make your site work? Let’s put it back, carefully and selectively, while
minimising the impact on load time.
That means scripts should be loaded (a) low-down, and/or (b) marked defer (or, better yet, async), so they don’t block page rendering.
If you haven’t already, you might like to View Source on this page. Count my <script> tags. You’ll probably find just two of them: one external file marked
async, and a second block right at the bottom.
The inline <script> in my footer.php wraps a single line of PHP: which looks a little like
this: <?php echo implode("\n\n", apply_filters( 'danq_footer_js', [] ) ); ?>. For each item in an initially-empty array, it appends to the script tag. When I render
anything that requires JavaScript, e.g. for 360° photography, I can just add to that
(keyed, to prevent duplicates when viewing an archive page) array. Thus, the relevant script gets added exclusively to the pages where it’s needed, not to the entire site.
The only inline script added to every page loads my service worker, which itself aims to optimise caching as well as providing limited “offline” functionality.
While you’re tweaking your JavaScript anyway, you might like to check that any suitable addEventListeners are set to passive mode. Especially if you’re doing anything with touch or
mousewheel events, you can often increase the perceived performance of these interactions by not letting your custom code block the default browser behaviour.
3. Don’t use a CDN
Wait, what? That’s the opposite of what everybody else recommends. To understand why, you have to think about why people recommend a CDN in the first place. Their reasons are usually threefold:
Proximity
Claim: A CDN delivers content geographically-closer to the user.
Retort: Often true. But in step 4 we’re going to make sure that everything critical comes within the first TCP
sliding window anyway, so there’s little benefit, and there’s a cost to that extra DNS lookup and fresh handshake. Edge
caching your own contentmay have value, but for most sites it’ll have a much smaller impact than almost everything else on this list.
Precaching
Claim: A CDN improves the chance resources are precached in the user’s browser.
Retort: Possibly true, especially with fonts (although see step 6) but less than you’d think with JS libraries because
there are so many different versions/hosts of each. Yours may well be the only site in the user’s circuit that uses a particular one!
Power Claim: A CDN has more resources than you and so can better-withstand spikes of traffic.
Retort: Maybe, but they also introduce an additional single-point-of-failure. CDNs aren’t magically immune
to downtime nor content-blocking, and if you depend on one you’ve just doubled the number of potential failure points that can make your site instantly useless. Furthermore:
in exchange for those resources you’re trading away your users’ privacy and security: if a CDN gets hacked, every site that
uses it gets hacked too.
Consider edge-caching your own content only if you think you need it, but ditch jsDeliver, cdnjs, Google Hosted Libraries etc.
Hell: if you can, ditch all JavaScript served from third-parties and slap a Content-Security-Policy: script-src 'self' header on your domain to dramatically reduce
the entire attack surface of your site!8
4. Reduce your HTML and CSS size to <12kb compressed
There’s a magic number you need to know: 12kb. Because of some complicated but fascinating maths (and depending on how your hosting is configured), it can be significantly faster to
initially load a web resource of up to 12kb than it is to load one of, say, 15kb. Also, for the same reason, loading a web resource of much less than 12kb
might not be significantly faster than loading one only a little less than 12kb.
Inlining as much essential content as possible (CSS, SVGs,
JavaScript etc.) to bring you back up to close-to that magic number again!
Again, this probably flies in the face of everything you were taught about performance. I’m sure you were told that you should <link> to your stylesheets so that they
can be cached across page loads. But it turns out that if you can make your HTML and CSS small enough, the opposite is true and you should inline the stylesheet again: caching styles becomes almost irrelevant if you get all the content in
a single round-trip anyway!
For extra credit, consider optimising your homepage’s CSS so it’s even smaller by excluding directives that only apply to
non-homepage pages, and vice-versa. Assuming you’re using a preprocessor, this shouldn’t be too hard: at simplest, you can have a homepage.css and main.css,
each derived from a set of source files some of which they share (reset/normalisation, typography, colours, whatever) and the rest which is specific only to that part of the site.
Can’t manage to get your HTML and CSS down below the magic
number? Then at least ensure that your HTML alone weighs in at <12kb compressed and you’ll still get some of the
benefits. If you’ve got the headroom, you can selectively include a <style> block containing only the most-crucial CSS, with a particular focus on any that results in layout shifts (e.g. anything that specifies the height: of otherwise dynamically-sized
block elements, or that declares an element position: absolute or position: fixed). These kinds of changes are relatively computationally-expensive because
they cause content to re-flow, so provide hints as soon as possible so that the browser can accommodate for them.
5. Make the first load awesome
We don’t really talk about content being “above the fold” like we used to, because the modern Web has such a diverse array of screen sizes and resolutions that doing so doesn’t make
much sense.
But if loading your full page is still going to take multiple HTTP requests (scripts, images, fonts, whatever),
you should still try to deliver the maximum possible value in the first round-trip. That means:
Making sure all your textual content loads immediately! Unless you’re delivering a huge amount of text, there’s absolutely no excuse for lazy-loading text: it’s
usually tiny, compresses well, and it’s fast to parse. It’s also the most-important content of most pages. Get it delivered to the browser so it can be rendered rightaway.
Reserving space for blocks by sizing images appropriately, e.g. using <img width="..." height="..." ...> or having them load as a background with
background-size: cover or contain in a block sized with CSS delivered in the initial payload. This
reduces layout shift, which mitigates the need for computationally-expensive content reflows.
If possible (see point 4), move vector images that support basic site functionality, like logos, inline. This might also apply to icons, if they’re “as important” as text content.
Marking everything up with standard semantic HTML. There’s a trend for component-driven design to go much too
far, resulting in JavaScript components being used in place of standard elements like links, buttons, and images, resulting in highly-fragile websites: when those scripts fail (or are
very slow to load), the page becomes unusable.
6. Reduce your dependence on downloaded fonts
Fonts are lovely and can be an important part of your brand identity, but they can also add a lot of weight to your web pages.
If you’re ready and able to drop your webfonts and appreciate the beauty and flexibility of a system font stack (I get it: I’m not there quite yet!), you can at least make
smarter use of your fonts:
Every modern browser supports WOFF2, so you can ditch those chunky old formats you’re clinging onto.
If you’re only using the Latin alphabet, minify your fonts further by dropping the characters you don’t need: tools like Google Webfonts
Helper can help with this, as well as making it easier to selfhost fonts from the most-popular library (is a smart idea for the reasons described under point 3, above!). There are
tools available to further minify fonts if e.g. you only need the capital letters for your title font or something.
Browsers are pretty clever and will work-around it if you make a mistake. Didn’t include an emoji or some obscure mathematical symbol, and then accidentally used them in a
post? Browsers will switch to a system font that can fill in the gap, for you.
Make the most-liberal use of the font-display: CSS directive that you can tolerate!
Don’t use font-display: block, which is functionally the default in most browsers, unless you absolutely have to.
font-display: fallback is good if you’re too cowardly/think your font is too important for you to try font-display: optional.
font-display: optional is an excellent choice for body text: if the browser thinks it’s worthwhile to download the font (it might choose not to if the operating
system indicates that it’s using a metered or low-bandwidth connection, for example), it’ll try to download it, but it won’t let doing so slow things down too much and it’ll
fall-back to whatever backup (system) font you specify.
font-display: swap is also worth considering: this will render any text immediately, even if the right font hasn’t downloaded yet, with no blocking time
whatsoever, and then swap it for the right font when it appears. It’s probably better for headings, because large paragraphs of text can be a little disorienting if they change
font while a user is looking at them!
7. Cache pre-compressed static files
It’s possible that by this point you’re saying “if I had to do this much work, I might as well just use a static site generator”. Well good news: that’s what you’re about to
do!
Obviously you should make sure all your regular caching improvements (appropriate HTTP headers for caching, a
service worker that further improves on that logic based on your content’s update schedule, etc.) first. Again: everything in this guide presupposes that you’ve already done the things
that normal people do.
By aggressively caching pre-compressed copies of all your pages, you’re effectively getting the best of both worlds: a website that, for anonymous visitors, is served directly from
.html.gz files on a hard disk or even straight from RAM in memcached10,
but which still maintains all the necessary server-side interactivity to allow it to be used as a conventional Web-based CMS
(including accepting comments if that’s your jam).
WP Super Cache can do the heavy lifting for you for a filesystem-based solution so long as you put it into “Expert” mode and
amending your webserver configuration. I’m using Nginx, so I needed a try_files directive like this:
I’m sure your favourite performance testing tool has already complained at you about your failure to use the best formats possible when serving images to your users. But how can you fix
it?
There are some great plugins for improving your images automatically and/or in bulk – I use EWWW Image Optimizer – but
to really make the most of them you’ll want to reconfigure your webserver to detect clients that Accept: image/webp and attempt to dynamically
serve them .webp variants, for example. Or if you’re ready to give up on legacy formats and replace all your .pngs with .webps, that’s probably
fine too!
Assuming you’ve got curl and Imagemagick‘s identify, you can see this in action:
curl -s https://danq.me/_q23u/2023/11/dynamic.png -H "Accept: image/webp" | identify -
(Will give you a WebP image)
curl -s https://danq.me/_q23u/2023/11/dynamic.png -H "Accept: image/png" | identify -
(Will give you a PNG image, even though the URL is the same)
9. Simplify, simplify, simplify
The single biggest impact you can have upon the performance of your WordPress pages is to make them less complex.
Writing my templates and posts so that they’re compatible with CapsulePress helps keep my code necessarily-simple. You don’t have to
do that, though, but you should be asking yourself:
Does my DOM need to cascade so deeply? Could I achieve the same with less?
Am I pre-emptively creating content, e.g. adding a hidden <dialog> directly to the markup in the anticipation that it might be triggered later using
JavaScript, rather than having that JavaScript run document.createElement the element after the page becomes readable?
Have I created unnecessarily-long chains of CSS selectors11
when what I really want is a simple class name, or perhaps even a semantic element name?
10. Add a Service Worker
A service worker isn’t magic. In particular, it can’t help you with those new visitors hitting your site for the first time12.
But a suitable service worker can do a few things that can help with performance. In particular, you might consider:
Precaching assets that you anticipate they’re likely to need (e.g. if you use different stylesheets for the homepage and other pages, you can preload both so no matter
where a user lands they’ve already got the CSS they’ll need for the entire site).
Preloading popular pages like the homepage and recent articles, allowing them to load quickly.
Caching a fallback pages – and other resources as-they’re-accessed – to support a full experience for users even if they (or your site!) disconnect from the Internet (or even
embedding “save for offline” functionality!).
Chapters 7 and 8 of Going Offline by Jeremy Keith are
especially good for explaining how this can be achieved, and it’s all much easier than everything else I just described.
Anything else?
Did I miss anything? If you’ve got a tip about ramping up WordPress performance that isn’t one of the “typical seven” – probably because it’s too hard to be worthwhile for most people –
I’d love to hear it!
Footnotes
1 You’ll sometimes see guides that suggest that using a CDN is to be recommended specifically because it splits your assets among multiple domains/subdomains, which mitigates browsers’ limitation on the
number of files they can download simultaneously. This is terrible advice, because such limitations essentially don’t exist any more, but DNS lookups and TLS handshakes still have a bandwidth and computational cost. There are good
things about CDNs, sometimes, but this has not been one of them for some time now.
2 I’m not sure why guides keep stressing the importance of minifying code,
because by the time you’re compressing them too it’s almost pointless. I guess it’s helpful if your compression fails?
3 “Use a faster server” is a “just throw money/the environment at it” solution. I’d like
to think we can do better.
4 For my personal blog, I choose to prioritise user experience, privacy, accessibility,
resilience, and standards compliance above almost everything else.
5 If you prefer to keep your backstab code separate, you can put it in a custom plugin,
but you might find that you have to name it something late in the alphabet – I’ve previously used names like zzz-danq-anti-plugin-hacks – to ensure that they load
after the plugins whose functionality you intend to unhook: broadly-speaking, WordPress loads plugins in alphabetical order.
6 I’ve assumed you’re using a classic, not block, theme. If you’re using a block theme,
you get a whole different set of performance challenges to think about. Don’t get me wrong: I love block themes and think they’re a great way to put more people in control of their
site’s design! But if you’re at the point where you’re comfortable digging this deep into your site’s PHP code,
you probably don’t need that feature anyway, right?
7 WordPress is really good at serving functionally-duplicate content, so search
engines appreciate it if you declare a proper canonical URL.
8 Before you choose to block all third-party JavaScript, you might have to
whitelist Google Analytics if you’re the kind of person who doesn’t mind selling their visitor data to the world’s biggest harvester of personal information in exchange for some
pretty graphs. I’m not that kind of person.
10 I’ve experimented with mounting a ramdisk and storing the WP Super Cache directory
there, but it didn’t make a huge difference, probably because my files are so small that the parse/render time on the browser side dominates the total cascade, and they’re already
being served from an SSD. I imagine in my case memcached would provide similarly-small benefits.
11 I really love the power of CSS preprocessors like Sass, but they do make it deceptively easy to create many more – and longer – selectors
than you intended in your final compiled stylesheet.
12 Tools like Lighthouse usually simulate first-time visitors, which can be a little
unfair to sites with great performance for established visitors. But everybody is a first-time visitor at least once (and probably more times, as caches expire or are
cleared), so they’re still a metric you should consider.
Now I’ve added support for Spartan3 too and, seeing as the implementations shared functionality, I’ve
combined all three – Gemini, Spartan, and Gopher – into a single package: CapsulePress.
CapsulePress is a Gemini/Spartan/Gopher to WordPress bridge. It lets you use WordPress as a CMS for any or all of
those three non-Web protocols in addition to the Web.
For example, that means that this post is available on all of:
It’s also possible to write posts that selectively appear via different media: if I want to put something exclusively on my gemlog, I can, by assigning metadata that
tells WordPress to suppress a post but still expose it to CapsulePress. Neat!
I’ve open-sourced the whole thing under a super-permissive license, so if you want your own WordPress blog to “feed” your Gemlog… now you can. With a few caveats:
It’s hard to use. While not as hacky as the disparate piles of code it replaced, it’s still not the cleanest. To modify it you’ll need a basic comprehension of all
three protocols, plus Ruby, SQL, and sysadmin skills.
It’s super opinionated. It’s very much geared towards my use case. It’s improved by the use of templates. but it’s still probably only suitable for this
site for the time being, until you make changes.
It’s very-much unfinished. I’ve got a growing to-do list, which should
be a good clue that it’s Not Finished. Maybe it never will but. But there’ll be changes yet to come.
Whether or not your WordPress blog makes the jump to Geminispace4, I hope you’ll came take a look at mine at one of the URLs linked above,
and then continue to explore.
If you’re nostalgic for the interpersonal Internet – or just the idea of it, if you’re too young to remember it… you’ll find it there. (That Internet never actually went away,
but it’s harder to find on today’s big Web than it is on lighter protocols.)
It turns out that by default, WordPress replaces emoji in its feeds (and when sending email) with images of those emoji, using the Tweemoji set, and with the alt-text set to the original emoji. These images are hosted at https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/…-based
URLs.
I can see why this functionality was added: what if the feed reader didn’t support Unicode or didn’t have a font capable of showing the appropriate emoji?
But I can also see reasons why it might not be desirable to everybody. For example:
Downloading an image will always be slower than rendering an emoji.
The code to include an image is always more-verbose than simply including an emoji.
As seen above: a feed reader which imposes a minimum size on embedded images might well render one “wrong”.
It’s marginally more-verbose for screen reader users to say “Image: heart emoji” than just “heart emoji”, I imagine.
Serving an third-party image when a feed item is viewed has potential privacy implications that I try hard to avoid.
Replacing emoji with images is probably unnecessary for modern feed readers anyway.
That’s all there is to it. Now, my feed reader shows my system’s emoji instead of a huge image:
I’m always grateful to discover that a piece of WordPress functionality, whether core or in an extension, makes proper use of hooks so that its functionality can be changed, extended,
or disabled. One of the single best things about the WordPress open-source ecosystem is that you almost never have to edit somebody else’s code (and remember to re-edit it
every time you install an update).